Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pg_ctl idempotent option

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_ctl idempotent option
Date: 2013-01-14 15:47:12
Message-ID: 21755.1358178432@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>>> Here is a patch to add an option -I/--idempotent to pg_ctl, the result
>>> of which is that pg_ctl doesn't error on start or stop if the server is
>>> already running or already stopped.

>> Idempotent is a ten-dollar word.  Can we find something that average
>> people wouldn't need to consult a dictionary to understand?

> --no-error perhaps?

Meh, that's probably going too far in the direction of imprecision.
The point of this patch is that only very specific errors are
suppressed.

I don't have a better idea though.  It'd be easier if there were
separate switches for the two cases, then you could call them
--ok-if-running and --ok-if-stopped.  But that's not very workable,
if only because both would want the same single-letter abbreviation.

			regards, tom lane


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thom BrownDate: 2013-01-14 15:48:57
Subject: Re: pg_ctl idempotent option
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2013-01-14 15:35:57
Subject: Re: erroneous restore into pg_catalog schema

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group